I think you definitely want to use c2c. lamd mode seems to produce
a different range of error conditions than c2c, and they are much
less easy to understand from the standpoint of a user.
We saw a threefold increase in errors when we used -lamd... but
were unable to determine why this was so. The error messages
seemed to become random when -lamd was used.
Phil
Jeff Squyres wrote:
> You might also want to use TCP or any of the other C2C RPIs -- lamd is
> definitely slower than the C2C versions.
--
Phil Ehrens <pehrens_at_[hidden]>| Fun stuff:
The LIGO Laboratory, MS 18-34 | http://www.ralphmag.org
California Institute of Technology | http://www.yellow5.com
1200 East California Blvd. | http://www.total.net/~fishnet/
Pasadena, CA 91125 USA | http://slashdot.org
Phone:(626)395-8518 Fax:(626)793-9744 | http://kame56.homepage.com
|
